Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

If the '08 nomination came down to Clark, Clinton or Kerry..

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
WI_DEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:13 PM
Original message
Poll question: If the '08 nomination came down to Clark, Clinton or Kerry..
who would you support?

Sorry, polls are turned off at Level 3.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
inslee08 Donating Member (155 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
1. Clark
Edited on Sat Jan-29-05 03:16 PM by inslee08
He'd be the only one that stands a chance.

Edit: Though if it looked like Rudy was gonna be the nom. for the Repubs, then Hillary wouldn't be a bad option (bringing attention to Rudy's infidelity?)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
2. Clark for me nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Virginia Dem Donating Member (41 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 05:57 PM
Response to Reply #2
42. none of the above
I would leave the party if that sorry lineup is all we can come up with
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiCoup2K4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:17 PM
Response to Original message
3. Given those 3 choices, I'd definitely go with Clark.
But I still think he needs to get something on his political resume first. If the Arkansas Governor's mansion opens up in 2006, he should go for that. Of course then he would probably have to avoid making any pledges to serve out a full 4 years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jai4WKC08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #3
21. Doesn't matter what he promises
Altho I am certain he wouldn't break a promise made, for all that many have done so in the past.

Even if he made no promise, it just wouldn't work. Look at it this way: Elected in Nov '06, takes office in Jan '07... when do you think he would have to begin his presidential campaign? Feb? March? What could he accomplish as governor while campaigning? What would be the point?

Clark has the experience of office comparable to a state governor hands down. More really, because he has the foreign policy and defense experience too. So there should be no question as to whether he can govern. It's only a question of whether he can campaign and win.

Seems to me it makes more far sense to judge his campaign skills based on how he campaigns for the nomination. If it turns out true that he's a "bad campaigner" (instead of what Clarkies say about his late start, second-rate staff, how much he's learned... yada yada) then there's no way he'll win the nomination so you have nothing to worry about. But if we do turn out to be right, you'll see a very different campaign than the one he ran in '03/'04. I hope you'll keep an open mind when the time comes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 06:06 AM
Response to Reply #21
76. The republican/media created "Clark is a bad campaigner" meme
Funny how in the end it wasn't Clark who turned out to be the bad campaigner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
4. Of the three:
Kerry would be Adlai Stevenson, Clinton is too willing to sell out to the Republicanites, and Clark would be a fresh face (to most people) who knows how not to take any crap from anyone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iamjoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
5. None Of Them Are Very Electable
in a general election.
methinks there's lots of mud for Clark yet to be slung, perhaps stuff that would make what the Swifties did to Kerry look like child's play. I have nothing really against Clark, mind you, just that I don't imagine one gets to be a Supreme Allied Commander without pissing off a few people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mikehiggins Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #5
24. Start off with "butcher of Kosovo" and crank it up from there
The difference in a Clark campaign would be two-fold, however.

First, Clark wouldn't let a minute go past without launching a vicious counterattack, ripping into the people making the charges for everything from robbing the church collection box to throwing disabled widows out of their foreclosed houses into the streets in February. To start with.

Second, a Clark campaign would be on the offensive from the first day, filling the time from Iowa to ELection Day with a contiuous, coherent campaign hammering away at the faults and failures of his opponent.

Clark in 2008 would not be politics as usual and America would be better off for that one fact.

The real question is who do the GOPukes turn to now? After Dubya they have no credible national candidates out there who will be acceptable to God's Fascists on the right. Four years of red meat will leave them unwilling to accept a compromise candidate and we could see a replay of the Goldwater fiasco.

Wouldn't that be nice?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pepperbelly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #24
28. remember how many Americans he lost in Serbia during the Kosovo
affair?

Exactly.

I think it can ahndle itself (with a little help from his friends).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveWarrior Donating Member (31 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #28
46. American-Albanians will tesify to being saved from genocide in
Edited on Sat Jan-29-05 06:13 PM by ProgressiveWarrior
commercials to help General Clark.

The only Butcher of Kosovo was Milosevic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ediacara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #46
56. Welcome to DU!
And I agree completely re: Milosevic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveWarrior Donating Member (31 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 12:41 AM
Response to Reply #56
71. Thank you so much, DinoBoy
I took the plunge today and jumped in with both feet. I've read enough to see who some of the DU diplomats, bullies, thinkers, and issues are.


Milosevic is a Hitler fan and the Serbs in this country have been huge Bush backers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 10:37 PM
Response to Reply #24
63. A clue for you
Did you see the exit polls on who attacked more in this campaign???? Kerry. That's right. That's what the public believed. And if you have your friendly lefties rolling their eyes and sniffing their noses at the "militarist", just like they did the "corporatist"; and helping the right by repeating the talking points instead of fully cooperating with the campaign; then you're going to have the exact same results. The problem is as much with rank and file Democrats who don't know how to fall in line as it is with the campaign strategists. Too many cooks spoil the broth. That's what's wrong with the Democratic party. If we don't learn anything else from this election, we ought to learn that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
high density Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #5
41. OH yeah, the "World War III" stuff will be back
Edited on Sat Jan-29-05 05:54 PM by high density
But unlike Kerry's team, I don't think we'd see Clark just sitting back and letting these distortions take root.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 04:07 AM
Response to Reply #41
73. The World War III thing would just make Clark look like a tough hombre...
Edited on Sun Jan-30-05 04:07 AM by FrenchieCat
during a general election, cause you've got to remember that Americans eat that sh*t up for dinner. They like "bring it on", etc....

Plus the press wouldn't allow that one, cause many in the U.S. military really don't like British General Macko Jacko of Bloody Sunday fame...

PUTIN ENDED UP INVADING CHECHNYA BECAUSE OF IMBECILE GENERAL MICHAEL JACKSON DISOBEYING CLARK'S ORDERS.

The result was a humiliation for NATO, a tonic for the Russian military and an important lesson for the then-obscure head of the Russian national security council, Vladimir Putin. As later Russian press reports showed, Putin knew far more about the Pristina operation than did the Russian defense or foreign ministers. It was no coincidence that a few weeks afterward, Russian bombers buzzed NATO member Iceland for the first time in a decade. A few weeks after that, with Putin as prime minister, Russian troops invaded Chechnya. Putin learned the value of boldness in the face of Western hesitation. Clark learned that he had no backup in Washington.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=artic ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mojambo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
6. A Clark nomination would take me similarly to the Kerry one in 2004
Not a guy I would be pushing, but probably I guy I would vote for.
I might not be exceptionally excited about it though.

It's way too early to say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:20 PM
Response to Original message
7. Love Clark But There Are So Many Other Options... I Won't Respond
:)

It's a longggggggggg way to 08.

God, I hope we even make it that far.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cheswick2.0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. So you didn't vote in this poll?
ummmmmmmmm okay
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arcos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:25 PM
Response to Original message
8. Clark will always win any DU poll...
The other choices really don't matter much, he will always win :P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mikehiggins Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 04:57 PM
Response to Reply #8
25. Are you saying the Clarkistas dominate DU?
Where did the other folk go?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arcos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 04:30 AM
Response to Reply #25
74. Ever since Clark decided to run he has dominated DU...
At first there were a lot of Dean supporters, but when Clark announced things became even. A lot of DU folks supported him, and lots of new Clark voters were drawn to DU later on...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveWarrior Donating Member (31 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #8
45. Does DU only serve up sour grapes?
Edited on Sat Jan-29-05 06:10 PM by ProgressiveWarrior
Is it any surprise that Clark is winning? He's certainly not business-as-usual. And there aren't alot of votes up, considering DU many thousands of members?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ginnyinWI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
9. Kerry for me
Edited on Sat Jan-29-05 03:29 PM by ginnyinWI
He still has a solid base of support, and is still on the job, trying to make America better. He has a heart and passion for his country. You can tell he means it--he's not doing the stuff he has lately only for his own political purposes. I don't blame the loss of the election on him, or even his campaign. I blame the media primarily, and the war, which Bush/Cheney used to scare and fool people with.

edit: That's why the election was close: if all the votes had been counted, I believe he would still have had the most electoral votes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:38 PM
Response to Reply #9
68. Agreed
Edited on Sat Jan-29-05 11:39 PM by zulchzulu
Despite all the Kerry bashing here on DU, he is doing a fantastic job and will continue to do so.

Kerry came the closest to any wartime president since 1916 in not "officially" winning.

I think he won, but thanks to Diebold and BBV as well as a lazy media more concerned about Michael Jackson, Scott Peterson and working for the Pentagon to "cover" the war, Kerry is now just a senator slugging for us (like he has for over 20+ years).

Until otherwise (and 2008 is a political infinity away), I'm still with Kerry in 2008.

While I like Clark, I personally am not that impressed with him as a presidential candidate. Hillary is a guaranteed loss.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
10. It's ABC for me!
and that's Anybody But Clinton!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dand Donating Member (636 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:31 PM
Response to Original message
11. Pitiful choices, Clark would be the least embarrassing.
Kerry and Clinton are in bed with the Republicans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleClarkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. I'll thank you not to lump Clinton and Kerry together
Kerry is not in bed with the Republicans. Most of his votes have been quite liberal and progressive, especially the legisation he's pushing now.

The most conservative things about him is he's a budget hawk and something of a foreign policy hawk where terrorism is concerned. I don't fault him for that because he came to his knowledge of foreign policy and terrorism though his BCCI and Iran/Contra investigations. He's seen the organizations involved.

I voted Kerry. Clark is still too green with not alot of political experience. I'm also afraid that we only saw the tip of the iceburg of what the Republicans could smear him with given half the chance. Clinton at the moment, until I give her a good gander, doesn't hit me right. There is something I don't like, I don't know what.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ginnyinWI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. I also don't think the issue of military experience is going away,

and she doesn't have any.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveWarrior Donating Member (31 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #12
34. Thanks, LittleKerry
Edited on Sat Jan-29-05 06:18 PM by ProgressiveWarrior
I noticed how having alot of political experience served Kerry so very well during the last year right up until his No Surrender on Nov. 3.

:eyes:

The vetting to be a VP or President is child's play in comparison to the vetting needed to become THE top officer in the Army. A career politician with a long history of voting on every side of an issue is much easier to target.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dand Donating Member (636 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #12
38. Kerry is a sell out. thanks for the thanks,
but he quit so fast I got whip lash. He is a total loser.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #11
18. Kerry ? In bed with the Repukes? Are you snorting silly string?
Edited on Sat Jan-29-05 04:01 PM by saracat
Do you watch how he votes? Have you been paying attention? Clinton is acting weird lately , I grant you that but Kerry? That is preposterous. No one is doing more to piss off the repukes than perhaps Boxer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kerrygoddess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. Snorting Silly String!
ROFLMAO!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cheswick2.0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:43 PM
Response to Original message
13. did you make sure to get all those links to this poll out to the Clark Web
sites?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. It has probably already been done.
;-)

Give it an hour or so and watch what happens!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kerrygoddess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #13
20. Good... Spam the poll results!
That's democracy in action. Spewed poll results... who else does that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveWarrior Donating Member (31 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #13
35. Another Clark Thread blessed by Whining Complainers
Edited on Sat Jan-29-05 05:45 PM by ProgressiveWarrior
That Medicare Bill cut off so many unbalanced people's abilities to get the help they need to keep on an even keel.

Yeah, there's no way else Clark could win. Uh huh.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BillZBubb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 03:57 PM
Response to Original message
17. Right now, they all look like losers.
But four years is a lifetime in politics.

Kerry has the best chance of the three to win, but he's still an underdog against the Repug attack machine. He's got a lot of work to do to restore his credibility and his favorables. A lot of us on the left have very bad feelings about his policies and his campaign.

Hillary just cannot win given her current tack. She's moving right, yet is despised by the right. This is a classic Democratic screwup. She'll never win any converts over there and she's alienating the active members of her base. A proven recipe for defeat.

Clark needs some hands on governing experience. As someone else pointed out, the equivalent of the SwiftboatScum will appear and take him out--count on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roguevalley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #17
22. Personally, Clark is the one. Hillary is pissing me off so much I
would be challenged to vote for her if I lived in New York. Kerry is still too much heat for me right now. Clark because he's a good accomplished man that scares the pigs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
windbreeze Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 09:13 PM
Response to Reply #17
58. Governing Experience??
I would say, when you get right down to it, Clark has at least the equivalent of being a Mayor or Governor under his hat...What's running a military base considered? Or being head of NATO?...A military base depending upon it's size, has tens of thousands of men, women, children living inside it's proximity..There are schools, churches, stores, bars...That same base, has police, firemen, hospitals, and lots of bases have their own air facilities...and most likely more arms than you would find in any city....That same base can exist independently from any civilian entity in the same area...oh, and the head guy, runs it all, and IS responsible for every aspect of it..Every aspect of it..from the GI getting along with his wife, to their children's schools...to morale, and making sure his troops are in a ready state..IF that is NOT considered governing experience, I will eat my hat...
windbreeze
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pepperbelly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 05:38 AM
Response to Reply #17
75. How much "governing experience" did Washington, Jackson, or Ike have?
There is nothing in the Constituition requiring that. And, as we look at it politically, it doesn't seem to be a requirement historically either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JVS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 04:32 PM
Response to Original message
23. Ugh
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemDogs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #23
26. Double ugh
Kerry didn't do it.
HRClinton's name alone would continue to raise more money for R's and than for D's.
Don't want to watch the videos anymore of Clark praising Republican after Republican, AFTER he was out of the military.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jonnyblitz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #26
47. triple ugh. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveWarrior Donating Member (31 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #26
52. Every 2004 Dem candidate praised Bush after Afghanistan
Edited on Sat Jan-29-05 06:29 PM by ProgressiveWarrior
and no one was in the military at the time. Dean included.

Karl Rove's work to have put out a spliced out-of-context video clip so Fox News could play it time after time (and so other networks could pick it up on feeds) to smear Clark right after he declared his entrance into the race just so that the gullible Democratic base sheeple could be aghast.

Kinda like that Scream. Sheeple are so easily manipulated on both sides of the political spectrum.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Texas_Kat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-31-05 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #26
82. Good, then watch Clark defending Kerry ...
...was there any more effective spokesman for Kerry during the 2004 election?

Here's a place to start.

http://www.u-wes-a.com/mediaclips-post.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Rinaldo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 05:05 PM
Response to Original message
27. I have reached saturation level on 2008 Presidential Polls
This is way too early to be so obsessed as a community with them. It may make some sense, I think, to speculate on who the contenders may be and what will help and hurt them, but endless straw polls?

By the way I am sorry to be directing any frustration at you, it is not personal. This poll makes as much sense as any of the others have. I guess I would rather just stay in discussion format for now regarding 2008 than do polling, but that is just my personal opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JHBowden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 05:11 PM
Response to Original message
29. Any would be fine with me.
I'm the most comfortable with Kerry, given he was fighting for us in the Senate when Clark was still a Republican. I trust him more than Hilary and Clark on our issues too, though I agree all nominally support most of our issues.

All of them would be better than Governor Owens, Chuck Hagel, or any other nimrod the GOP decides to run in 2008.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 05:16 PM
Response to Reply #29
31. "when Clark was still a Republican"
Your information is inaccurate. Wesley Clark was never a Republican in his life.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JHBowden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #31
36. Clark only voted for the worst ones.
Plus he had glowing praise for team Bush. Clark is on our team now, but we shouldn't ignore facts, no matter how ugly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #36
49. And in December 2000 AFTER the election was stolen
Howard Dean said George W. Bush was a moderate in his "soul."

He just moderately stole an election?

Yes, I agree, let's not ignore the facts. Let's just reach back to the primaries, dig out the facts, no matter how ugly, even though the management here has made it very clear they don't want it. Let's do it, anyway.

Do you have another Clark smear I can match with a Dean smear?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JHBowden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:38 PM
Response to Reply #49
67. Go ahead and smear Clark and Dean.
Do I care? Both candidates have their share of fanatical supporters. I'm merely stating why I feel more comfortable with Kerry than Hilary and Clark.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 08:03 AM
Response to Reply #67
80. Sorry, I didn't recognize you there
It was that endlessly repeated, untrue talking point, the one about Clark being a Republican, that threw me.

You certainly have a right to your comfort and I respect your choice, John Kerry :hi:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveWarrior Donating Member (31 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #36
55. Clark wasn't a Senator on both sides of the fence --
EVERYONE HAD GLOWING PRAISE FOR BUSH AFTER AFHGANISTAN INCLUDING KERRY AND DEAN AND EDWARDS ETCETERA.....

and General Clark voted for nothing -- he wasn't in Congress.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JHBowden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #55
69. Kerry's position was close to mine.
In October 2002, Hussein still wasn't letting inspectors into the country, and force had to be on the table. But pulling the inspectors out in March 2003 to occupy the country was a costly and probably stupid move.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GiovanniC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-31-05 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #69
84. Not to Get Too Far Off Track Here
But explain to me why Hussein refusing to let inspectors in (which he had stopped doing when the US and Israel started stacking inspection teams with CIA and Mossad spies) meant force had to be on the table? In what universe do we have a right to tell other countries what they can and cannot do? Which countries have the right to demand to the US that we allow weapons inspectors into OUR country, and would we tolerate foreign spies on those teams any better than Saddam did? What would our reaction be if a country told us to open all of our weapons sites to them or prepare to be invaded?

I don't want to come off like a Saddam apologist, but you're starting off with premises that shouldn't be taken for granted.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
haypops Donating Member (81 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #29
48. Sounds like th pot calling the kettle Republican
Clark never was a Republican but it would seem that raising money for an election in '04 and taking the dam 15 million home instead of helping other Democrats or even helping himself makes Kerry a pox on the party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveWarrior Donating Member (31 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #29
53. Why are you lying about Clark? Get your facts straight.
Yeah, Kerry was fighting for the IWR and the Patriot Act in the Senate
while most of us were saying, "NO!!!!!!!!!!!"

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joanski01 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 05:15 PM
Response to Original message
30. Well, dammit, if we can't have Clark, then
let's have Kucinich! Oh, that's right, he's too short. Teresa has funny hair. Dennis doesn't have a wife. Dean??? Oh, yeah, that's right, he screamed too loud. All of these flimsy excuses about our candidates, and bush* gets away with absolute murder. I believe that the current US Government is anti-American.

I want an intelligent liberal for president!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoshK Donating Member (112 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 05:41 PM
Response to Reply #30
39. You raise a very good point. If the supporters of a party are not
willing to support a candidate for his/her IDEAS (as opposed to his hair, his height, his marital status, etc), they really don't deserve to win. Supporting someone primarily because he's "electable" just means "I'm superficial, and too frightened to support someone just on the basis of their ideas." If you think like that, you invariably wind up backing a pathetic Establishment weasel like Kerry.

In the primaries, Kucinich was the only one who had serious and meaningfully new ideas. The rest were run-of-the-mill establishment figures (Dean's main plus was more in attitude than in any carefully developed program or overall analysis). But the Democratic electorate scarcely even gave Kucinich a real look. It's hard to feel sorry for people (ie, the Dem rank & file) who have so little courage, and are so easily manipulated by conventional wisdom.

The Democrats of today wouldn't have the guts to support an FDR (a wheelchair-bound cripple), nor a Lincoln (too ugly), nor a LaGuardia (too short). (Yes, I know the latter 2 were Republicans.) Today's Democratic voters insist on someone who looks like he could play president on TV. It still seems almost unbelievable that Democrats could have supported a disgusting pro-war weasel like Kerry, just because he looks like a TV president; while completely ignoring a Kucinich, because he's short.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoshK Donating Member (112 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 05:17 PM
Response to Original message
32. Such a field would be more proof that the Dems are terminal.
Kerry was the most pathetic two-faced weasel that has ever run for president. He couldn't even defend himself from a bunch of transparent 2-bit liars like the Swifties. He didn't even mention that his opponent was a war criminal by all standards of international law. He didn't mention Abu Ghraib or Enron. He tried to hide the one good thing he ever did in his life -- opposing the Vietnam War -- as though ashamed of it. How did he expect the public should be aware of the danger that Bush represented, if he himself wasn't willing to tell them?

Hillary is a thoroughly disgusting politician. She should be in the GOP, for all intents and purposes. The rightwing is correct to despise her. I despise her myself (though not for exactly the same reasons).

Clark is less odious than the other two, but still miserable. He was unimpressive during the primaries, stumbling on whether he was for or against the Iraq war. Seems about like Kerry, politically (ie, a reliable stooge of the ruling class), but doesn't know the issues as well. He's intelligent, but not more so than many politicians of both parties. The fact that he should be touted as a great hope of the Dem Party speaks merely to the bankruptcy of the Party, not to any real virtue of the candidate. The Democrats, for those who don't remember, just tried in this last campaign to play the "Our guy is a war hero" card. It didn't work too well, you might recall.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clarkie1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 05:37 PM
Response to Reply #32
37. Josh...
"Clark is less odious than the other two, but still miserable. He was unimpressive during the primaries"

Clark did FANTASTIC during the primaries. To my knowledge, never has a candidate who started so late done so well. Even after missing Iowa he got the 2nd or 3rd most votes of any of the candidates in the field.

"stumbling on whether he was for or against the Iraq war."

Clark was ALWAYS againt the Iraq war and the neo-con doctrine. He praised the troops, but not the policy and his OP-Ed shortly after the beginning of the war expressed praise for the swift military victory, but great concern about the overall policy, long-term committement, and future political stability of Iraq.

"Seems about like Kerry, politically (ie, a reliable stooge of the ruling class), but doesn't know the issues as well. He's intelligent, but not more so than many politicians of both parties."

Ruling class? Unlike silver-spoon politicos like Kerry, for most of his life Clark earned $50,000 a year or less. He grew up in a single parent household and worked his way into Wespoint, where he was first in his class and became a Rhodes scholar in philosophy, politics, and economics. That level of intellect is unusual in a politician, with the exception perhaps of Clinton. It's unusual, period!

The Clark movement is not based solely on the fact he is a war hero, it's about his intellect, integrity, and a higher standard of leadership that will promote democratic values and a liberal agenda.

Framing that to red-state voters in the person of a southern, plain-spoken general who doesn't have to defend his national security credentials certainly doesn't hurt, though!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoshK Donating Member (112 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 06:03 PM
Response to Reply #37
44. You're entitled to your opinion! Here are my responses to
the points you raise:

- To be a stooge of the ruling class, you don't have to be rich. Clinton and Nixon are examples of this that come to mind.
- About having a candidate who doesn't have to defend his national security cred: that was THE WHOLE POINT of the Kerry campaign, too. Or so they thought. It is true that he is Southern, so that gives him an extra appeal point (though Edwards was Southern too, & this didn't obviously help him a great deal).
- About his real attitude towards the use of US military force: Clark supported what the US did in Kosovo. He praised the School of the Americas. There is every reason to suppose that he shares values widely held in the military-industrial complex (though I concede he didn't speak about this enough to permit a clear & current reading of it). And what does he think, for example, about the US role in Vietnam? From what I read, he is nowhere near willing to concede that the entire enterprise was a terrible crime.
- "Stumbling" -- I was referring to the first days of his campaign where a question was asked about whether or not he would have voted to authorize the invasion. He wound up calling to his campaign manager for help with this question. I don't remember the exact details, but recall that it was an embarrassing moment of his opening day, & was considered a "beginner's mistake."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveWarrior Donating Member (31 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 06:59 PM
Response to Reply #44
57. Yeah, and Dean gave tax breaks to Enron while he was Governor
Edited on Sat Jan-29-05 07:18 PM by ProgressiveWarrior
and Kucinich was anti-choice until the primaries. According to your line of thinking, Dean is a corporate tool and Kucinich is a member of the Culture of Life club.

Read Wes Clark's books and get the real scoop. It's easy to be an armchair political commentator but harder to get the facts.

That's right...why don't you focus on the minutaie of opening day remarks by General Clark and I'll tell you about the Scream by Dean and the anti-choice stand by Kucinich and the IWR/Patriot Act votes by Kerry and Edwards....as well as the dumb things said on the trail by other career politican candidates during the primaries?

Pssst...it's 2005. That was 2003. General Clark has a very steep learning curve and acknowledged his mistake in not communicating better after the media had a f*cking filed day squealing like a stuck pig about it. What you're saying is similar to those who think Dean is going to be a screaming everyday as DNC Chair.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clarkie1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 09:53 PM
Response to Reply #44
59. Josh...
Edited on Sat Jan-29-05 10:01 PM by Clarkie1
Using your definition, have we ever had a president who isn't "a stooge of the ruling class?" I am not sure what your definition is for this.

Kerry, in my opinion, had no national security credentials. Simply serving in Vietnam and being on the foreign relations comittee part-time does not give one strong national security credentials post 9/11.

About his real attitude toward the U.S. use of military force: he was one of the few to urge we take action against the black genocide in Rwanda (google a book by Samantha Powers for more on this). Clark also wanted to stop the murders of a whole lot of minority Albania Muslims. He is an internationalist who negotiated peace and WIDELY RESPECTED in the European and world community.

Regarding the vote whether or not to authorize force and how he would have voted, you seem to be confusing a vote for the authorization to use force (political leverage) with a vote for Bush's policies and war. I am not saying Clark would have voted that way, but you seem to be confusing the two issues.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clarkie1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 05:23 PM
Response to Original message
33. These 08' polls have become tiresome n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dhinojosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 05:52 PM
Response to Original message
40. Marilyn Manson/SpongeBob '08



Now, more than ever!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dansolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 06:01 PM
Response to Original message
43. Clark, no question about it
Though I would rather see Al Gore over all of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AuntiBush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 06:24 PM
Response to Original message
50. GORE
GORE and ?? CLINTON. Hard to break away from my admiration for KERRY, though.

My dream... * is imPea-Ched, KERRY resumes. Peace on Earth, Goodwill towards all men/women presides again and all is well with America.

Then, I awaken to the dreary reality.
:shrug: :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PDittie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 06:27 PM
Response to Original message
51. Hillary only gets 7 votes? Same as undecided?
That's the only surprise here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fujiyama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 06:35 PM
Response to Original message
54. Clark for sure
I still think he'd have a decent shot at winning, moreso than the others mentioned.

I also like Kerry and Gore as well, but of the two I'd have to go with Gore.

Hillary is not getting my vote for the primaries...She'd be lucky enough to get it for the GE were she to be the nominee. Granted, my vote or not, she'd be a loser anyways.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elshiva Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 10:27 PM
Response to Original message
60. Kerry
Because he has the most experience and this country is too sexist to vote for a woman, even one as great as H. Clinton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clarkie1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #60
61. Experience in being a senator and losing a presidential election n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveWarrior Donating Member (31 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #61
72. That's a fact in American history books now
and unfortunately, in the American psyche as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 10:35 PM
Response to Original message
62. Wes Clark....
Of course!

One's been tried....the other is too blue!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
neverforget Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 10:39 PM
Response to Original message
64. Clark! Kerry had his chance and I'm not impressed by Clinton but
would vote for her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cosmokramer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:30 PM
Response to Original message
65. Kerry? I think not! He couldn't beat the WORST...
...PRESIDENT E.V.E.R.

When you can't beat the worst president in human history, you don't deserve a second shot.

Gimme Clark ANYDAY, with a wide grin on my face as I punch the chad.

Hillary isn't running, so that is not an option at all. She knows how polarizing she can be, and she is quite happy being a US Senator.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Califooyah Operative Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:34 PM
Response to Original message
66. It's so early,
but in my opinion, clark never won me over last time, and he'd better work to do it this time. Kerry i respect and trust he got my vote on this crazy early poll, clinton; please....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gemini Cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:49 PM
Response to Original message
70. Clark in '08
Best choice possible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 06:11 AM
Response to Original message
77. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Nightwing Donating Member (489 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 06:16 AM
Response to Original message
78. Clark all the way
Had he taken part in the Iowa caucus, I honestly believe he would have won the nomination in '04. He has an extreme distaste for * and will take the bastards to the woodshed at every opportunity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NicRic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 06:26 AM
Response to Original message
79. A diamond in the rough >Clark
Perhaps in his bid for the nomination in 04 Clark was a little green behind the ears ,as far as being a professional politician .I actually found that to be one of his positive traits. However in this day and age ,with a media the will eat up a spit out any little mistake a Dem contender would make while letting the idiot son off at everyturn, you have to polish your politicial smarts .I believe Clark is a diamond in the rough ,and once he poishes his politicial veiws ,not some one eles, HIS veiws .He will make Jeb look like the goober he is, and lets face it ,I believe that its a given that Jeb Bush will be who is put up against whichever one of the three listed choices. Now I also want to say that I would strongly back any of the three listed above and any conbination of them running agaist idiot son #2 !
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JNelson6563 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 08:13 AM
Response to Original message
81. Suckiest poll
ever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SharonRB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-31-05 11:28 AM
Response to Original message
83. I'm very torn between Clark and Kerry
Of course, whoever got the nomination would get my vote, but in the primary I just don't know yet. I definitely wouldn't vote for Hillary --not that I don't like her, but I think she's too divisive and has no chance to win. We're crazy if we nominate her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Sep 02nd 2014, 11:10 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC